Thank you oh,please help me tell them oh,look and naija's economy the way it is been handled and imagine what NOI will do with the world's finances. Time will tell the course things will take though she has better credentials than the rest but wait a minute i thought she cared more about naija cos she could have rejected the nomination abi na by force. Well best of luck to all of em

ekt_bear: Part of the agenda here seems to be the rest of the world wanting to poke their finger in America's eye.

Which is fine of course...but don't then try to couch it in language of "meritocracy", etc, etc.

Just be blunt and say you don't want them to appoint the head of the World Bank any more. In which case, you need to bring out your check book and fund your own organization..

We don't care if its the only bank in the world. Madam, JUST GO FOR IT 4 me better 9ja than american

Kobojunkie: As I was saying . .



Washington is GOVERNMENT of A COUNTRY and one country influencing another Country is Politics. However, World Bank is an organization that is government by rules and regulations that are not easily bent.

I would really like to know how you expect a World Bank President draw more investment into Africa? As is World Bank already invests the largest in African Countries. Many of our systems in Nigeria today already depend, and have depended on the World bank for decades as is. So believe me, I am curious as to learn how exactly you expect the world bank to take on the role of Government in Nigeria/Africa.

Imagine a situation where the WB is considering the citing of a major economic project and the option was narrowed to between Chile, Nigeria and Malaysia and Madam NOI heads the board that decides which country gets it, what do u think will be the final outcome? What benefit do u think the North has by having Sanusi as the CBN Gov? Remember that both the CBN and the WB have similar structure. No matter the rule governing these organisations there are usually internal board-room politics that come up when decisions are to be made some of them through voting.

PHIPEX: Imagine a situation where the WB is considering the citing of a major economic project in African and the option was narrowed to between Ghana, Nigeria and South Africa and Madam NOI heads the board that decides which country gets it. What do u think will be the final outcome? What benefit do u think the North has by having Sanusi as the CBN Gov? Remember that both the CBN and the WB have similar structure. No matter the rule governing these organisations there are usually internal board-room politics that come up when decisions are to be made some of them through voting.

As for citing major projects in one or more countries in Africa, the World bank already does that however there is no evidence that such actions boost investment in selected countries. For instance, only last fall, the world bank selected 4 states in Nigeria to receive well over 200 million dollars for road improvement projects.
There is, to date, not a lot of evidence to claim that as a result, those 4 states are doing better than other states in the same country, or in Africa as a whole. It certainly hasn't done so much to boost investment in our Agricultural,and even Health systems, which depend, to a great deal, on the input from foreign organizations such as the World Bank, WHO and UNICEF, even after over 30 years.
Iweala cannot promise return on investments that she cannot pay on. It is up to countries to do that and not the World Bank to make such promises on behalf of any country.

On projects going to Nigeria because the head of the NOI, or board making the decision is a Nigeria, if that happens, then . . . . Look, WorldBank is not Nigeria's play thing. So, asking me what the final outcome to what we are not sure is even allowed is asking me a question that makes little sense to this.

On the issue of benefits the North has with Sanusi as the CBN Governor, I will ask you what the SS/SE has gained as a result of the current President being from these regions. I assume you are aware of the public outrage when Sanusi attempted to make a donation, on behalf of Nigeria, to Northern states, and how there were calls for investigations. I am guessing that is not what you want for Iweala when and if she gets elected as the next World Bank President.

I never said rules and regulations are not bendable . . . my comment there says that they are not as easily bent as you would have with agencies that are run by particular nations. For instance, the donation from Sanusi, which I cited earlier, was against the rules set down for the CBN, but Sanusi bent it and the Government turned a blind eye. If that were to have happened at the World Bank, with the whole world watching, do you think he would gotten away with that?

Honestly, I don't think you have clearly answered my question in anyway. I am still asking, of what benefit will her getting this position be to Nigeria, and Nigerians as a whole. How exactly does having a Nigerian as World Bank president increase foreign investment in Nigeria?
I can't help but remember all the stories of how Obama's presidency would benefit Black America. Fast forward 4 years or so, and we are still wondering where those so-called benefits are.

this was the obama we organise a donation for and hold in high esteem when he was vying as US president,he visited ghana he didnt come here now see how he neglected a better candidate for a less qualify candidate.plus or minus ngozi has proof her worth.now let come home if ngozi is to contest nigeria presidency how many of us will support her with all these qualifications,will we not say she is a woman or easterner?

emmykk: this was the obama we organise a donation for and hold in high esteem when he was vying as US president,he visited ghana he didnt come here now see how he neglected a better candidate for a less qualify candidate.plus or minus ngozi has proof her worth.now let come home if ngozi is to contest nigeria presidency how many of us will support her with all these qualifications,will we not say she is a woman or easterner?

Don't you get tired of playing this 'me against the world card'? Let the Igbos bring out a formidable candidate and see if the whole nation would not vote for him\her.

I'm just wondering... of what benefit will it be to Nigeria if she becomes the world Bank's President? Infact what will the average Nigerian,African or somebody from the developing nation benefit from her presidency. I dont believe in sentiments at all, I would want the best/ better candidate to clinch the post.

I tire for we Nigerians oooo, do we think this is Nigerian politics where we want our kinsman to get the Job even if he's the least qualified.Abegi its high time we woke up from our slumber and wake up to reality.

Hmmm....this "foreign Direct Investment (FDI)" phrase again!

I thought OBJ spent 8yrs junketing all over the world looking/sourcing for FDI for Nigeria (and in the process got Travel Estacodes that eclipsed his annual salary like five times! Smart man!)
Mallam Sanusi Lamido too told us that if he performs some funky-Mallan magic on our banks, FDI would just rush-in! Today, we know how much the naira exchanges for all the major currencies.

I remember Mallam El-Rufai and his "Privatization of our National Assets like NITEL, Ajaokuta Steel, e.t.c ..mantra". He told us the goal is to get FDI ASAP!

Even Madam Okonjo lectured us about how Nigeria would be bombarded with FDI once we can triple the price of PMS; how the massive amount of "profit taking" would make greedy FDI money to flow in and foreigners would build new refineries for us!

Am still scratching my coconut head 'cos the number of FDI's that has landed between now and then is so much that l have lost count!

Now, it is "If Madam Ngozi becomes WB President, she will bring FDI to Nigeria"!

What an abused phrase, this FDI?

*In a country that lacks three uninterrupted hours of electricity in most of its major cities?
*In a country where policies change like Irish weather?
*In a country where corruption has become a national anthem?
*In a country where insecurity is so high that even the "spiritually-protected" Men of God even require heftily-muscled body-guards and kidnapping is now an Olympic sports!
*Dont let me even mention the menace of terrorism a.k.a. Boko Haram
*In a country where the transport system has completely collapsed and other infrastructures like Internet capacity is not only epileptic but a rip-off?

Aabegii oo! I have a better idea: If Eyimba of Aba wins the Premiership (Yes, EPL!), it will bring FDI to Nigeria!
Okay , you think its only you people that are intelligent, right?

FDI koo, FBI nii! May be you think business is run based on stewpidty and sentiments!
Even Nigerians themselves are taking their own "FDI" to places like Ghana!
Habbaa, these people just dont get it at all?

As for Madam Ngozi, l fervently pray she would be elected, l cant wait to get rid of her (and her elitist economic reforms) and l hope she would make President Jonathan and Mallam Sanusi, her special Advisers on Politics and Religious Banking respectively!

Unfortunately, "Dreams are not Horses" and l am a Beggar!

Lastpage!

@kobojunkie,
you are trying to play ignorance just to justify Ur stance which is not plausible.

you mentioned the road project for which around 200m was spent without having anything to show for it,but you also forgot that the reason was because corrupt people in place of authority knowing fully well that nobody care,embezzled the money.one reason is because we dont have a voice were the money came from.

i beg to believe you know that world bank does not do construction, this projects are done by companies in Nigeria or who will be brought to Nigeria.
you and i know that some policies in this country are influenced by the world bank,some of which are good and some bad. they influence many things in a country

i hope you can now see how foreign direct investment can be influenced in Nigeria's favour IF THE POSITION IS WELL HARNESSED like i opined earlier

aguiyi: @kobojunkie,
you are trying to play ignorance just to justify Ur stance which is not plausible.

Correction. I am simply trying to get you to provide support for the claim which you made. Is it wrong to ask you to EXPLAIN yourself?

aguiyi:
you mentioned the road project for which around 200m was spent without having anything to show for it,but you also forgot that the reason was because corrupt people in place of authority knowing fully well that nobody care,embezzled the money.one reason is because we dont have a voice were the money came from.

You are not making any sense at all now. You claim that Iweala as World Bank President will bring investment in. I cited a recent example of World Bank investment into just 4 States in Nigeria, now you tell me that corruption which continues to plague Nigeria will lead to embezzlement?

aguiyi:
i beg to believe you know that world bank does not do construction, this projects are done by companies in Nigeria or who will be brought to Nigeria.
you and i know that some policies in this country are influenced by the world bank,some of which are good and some bad. they influence many things in a country

hm. . . . you further debunk your own claim. So, if you know that World Bank does not do construction, and we already established that investment already comes from the World Bank into Nigeria, as it has for decades, why then did you posit that installing Iweala as President would somehow change the equation for Nigeria?

aguiyi:
i hope you can now see how foreign direct investment can be influenced in Nigeria's favour IF THE POSITION IS WELL HARNESSED like i opined earlier

Forgive me but what you have here is what I call 'gba jue' debating. All you have done is clearly show that yes investment already comes in from the World Bank, but corruption makes it hard for these investments to amount to much. You have in no way answered the question asked you but you have however successfully poked some holes in your logic by admitting that money already flows in from the World Bank even without Ngozi Iweala at the WorldBank.

ofcourse money flows in without her there but those monies end in the pocket of individuals instead of been spent on the project for which it was allocated.

with Ngozi as the WB president, there would be a change because she would want value for money allocated to her country.
i expect her been the world bank president to also increase existent funding and push for more.

ekt_bear: How can the guy buying french fries from my burger joint tell me the owner who to appoint?

You are the customer. I am the salesman and owner.

You are only a "shareholder" in my business in that you buy what I sell.

You don't get to dictate who runs the bank unless you put money into it. End of story.

Your post is couched in half-truths: first off, all 193 members are shareholders in the WB. And then:

As of 15 November 2009 the United States held 16.4% of total votes, Japan 7.9%, Germany 4.5%, the United Kingdom 4.3%, and France 4.3%.

So you see the other 83.6% can out vote the US except on matters regarding a change of the WB charter.
Moreover things are changing as economies such as India and China grow in size:

India will have a larger say in the affairs of the World Bank as it has become the seventh largest shareholder in the multilateral lender with 2.91% voting rights.

China has overtaken Germany, France and the UK to become the third largest shareholder in the Bank with 4.42% voting rights. Both India and China hitherto enjoyed an identical 2.77% voting rights.

So what do you think will happen when China becomes the world's largest economy? Concerning the structure of the WB:

Membership
There are 184 member countries that are shareholders in the IBRD, which is the primary arm of the WBG. To become a member, however, a country must first join the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The size of the World Bank's shareholders, like that of the IMF's shareholders, depends on the size of a country's economy. Thus, the cost of a subscription to the World Bank is a factor of the quota paid to the IMF.

There is an obligatory subscription fee, which is equivalent to 88.29% of the quota that a country has to pay to the IMF. In addition, a country is obligated to buy 195 World Bank shares (US$120,635 per share, reflecting a capital increase made in 1988). Of these 195 shares, 0.60% must be paid in cash in U.S. dollars while 5.40% can be paid in a country's local currency, in U.S. dollars, or in non-negotiable non-interest bearing notes. The balance of the 195 shares is left as "callable capital," meaning the World Bank reserves the right to ask for the monetary value of these shares when and if necessary. A country can subscribe a further 250 shares, which do not require payment at the time of membership but are left as "callable capital."

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/042303.asp#ixzz1qveINBbt

aguiyi: ofcourse money flows in without her there but those monies end in the pocket of individuals instead of been spent on the project for which it was allocated.

with Ngozi as the WB president, there would be a change because she would want value for money allocated to her country.
i expect her been the world bank president to also increase existent funding and push for more.

Sooooo . . . this new claim is in addition to the old claim that she would divert more investment to Nigeria? Or we you suggesting this is along the same lines?
You say expect her to increase amount of loans to Nigeria but, at the same time you expect she will implement more stringent rules to govern use of the said loans?And that is so much different from what the IMF imposes how?

NOI is running for her own reasons. Being president of world bank is just like any other directorial job; it has no benefits for Africa or Nigeria. This is another freak show by the world against Africa. We didn't beg America to elect Barack Obama, but you are all witness to the major freak show that traversed in major western news station; they made it into a major racial freak show. This is another freak show by the west again. We are watching.

Not a good idea to have

UN Secretary General - Korean
Future World Bank President - Korean

As far as I know there is nothing special about Korea to deserve this special status

Two things -

1. We should refrain from endorsing foreign candidates above and in preference to our own citizens vying for a respected and global position of leadership. Even if her citizenship was not Nigerian the fact she is a black woman, we ought to rally support and add voice to her success.

2. Whichever way any of us look at it, World Bank, and everything it stands for, is a shepherd dog. It is there to corrall the flocks for the capitalist barons. NOI or anyone else occupying the position will be called *President*. . . but truly it's just a glorified administrator position that reports up to the capital owners . . . .the true land barons of the globe.

franktolk: I'm just wondering... of what benefit will it be to Nigeria if she becomes the world Bank's President? Infact what will the average Nigerian,African or somebody from the developing nation benefit from her presidency. I dont believe in sentiments at all, I would want the best/ better candidate to clinch the post.

I tire for we Nigerians oooo, do we think this is Nigerian politics where we want our kinsman to get the Job even if he's the least qualified.Abegi its high time we woke up from our slumber and wake up to reality.

Absolutely no benefit to Nigeria. Iweala should just go back to the WB where they hold endless & useless meetings. Nigeria does not need her. I believe she's been in the doghouse ever since the oil subsidy removal fiasco. GEJ realized he made a mistake appointing her Economic Minister.

aletheia:
Your post is couched in half-truths: first off, all 193 members are shareholders in the WB. And then:

So you see the other 83.6% can out vote the US except on matters regarding a change of the WB charter.

Well, it isn't the US alone. It is US + allies. Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada.

Europe especially has zero incentive to deviate, since a betrayal of the US means they won't get to choose the leadership of the IMF any more...

Moreover things are changing as economies such as India and China grow in size:


So what do you think will happen when China becomes the world's largest economy? Concerning the structure of the WB:

Well we aren't in that position today, are we? 20 or 30 years from now, things might be very different. But for the selection happening today..

Marlboro1: Not a good idea to have

UN Secretary General - Korean
Future World Bank President - Korean

As far as I know there is nothing special about Korea to deserve this special status

He is an American citizen. In this country, regardless of your ethnicity/heritage, you can be treated as American (well, for the most part...).

Seems he moved to the US at 5 and grew up in Iowa

ekt_bear:

Well, it isn't the US alone. It is US + allies. Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada.

Europe especially has zero incentive to deviate, since a betrayal of the US means they won't get to choose the leadership of the IMF any more...

What betrayal? They all agreed last year henceforth to choose the leadership of the WB on merit; no more US forcing their way through. They signed an agreement and it only makes sense that Europe would follow through on those agreements. people just dont sit down and have agreements just for the fun of it. This is serious business.Once you sit at the table and sign up to choose the most qualified candidate, any talk of betrayal is ridiculous.

Ekt Bear now has a new hobby:spinning conspiracy theories about how the world is out to get America and poke America in the face. It's better than his old hobby: relentlessly making stuffs up all in an attempt to look intellectual. [size=4pt]nice line, hun[/size]?

@lastpage
many thanks. Common sense is that Ngozi is being used, even by The Economist flatterers, to derail Obama's campaign for second term. Obama has out-his predecessors and running well for re-election. If non-American becomes President of WB under Obama, he would have equipped the Republicans with the most effective campaign. All these Ngozi talk is nothing but white supremacist conspiracy.

ckkris: @lastpage
many thanks. Common sense is that Ngozi is being used, even by The Economist flatterers, to derail Obama's campaign for second term. Obama has out-his predecessors and running well for re-election. If non-American becomes President of WB under Obama, he would have equipped the Republicans with the most effective campaign. All these Ngozi talk is nothing but white supremacist conspiracy.

So the NYT, the most liberal paper in the country is also in on the conspiracy? hmmmm . . .

strangerf:

What betrayal? They all agreed last year henceforth to choose the leadership of the WB on merit; no more US forcing their way through. They signed an agreement and it only makes sense that Europe would follow through on those agreements. people just dont sit down and have agreements just for the fun of it. This is serious business.Once you sit at the table and sign up to choose the most qualified candidate, any talk of betrayal is ridiculous.

Citation for bolded?

Ekt Bear now has a new hobby:spinning conspiracy theories about how the world is out to get America and poke America in the face. It's better than his old hobby: relentlessly making stuffs up all in an attempt to look intellectual. [size=4pt]nice line, hun[/size]?

What are you talking about? I speculated on that being one possible motivation for what is going on here. I could be wrong. But ultimately that doesn't matter...my argument doesn't rest on the correctness of this. In fact the main point is that whatever their motivations are is irrelevant...America gets to decide since it (and its friends) are paying the bills.

Where is this NYT endorsement? Can anyone provide a link to it?

Leading the World Bank
President Obama’s nomination of Jim Yong Kim to head the World Bank is an inspired choice. The South Korean-born medical doctor and president of Dartmouth College has a stellar reputation as a global health expert.

Still, there is a problem: Since the bank was founded, all the presidents have been American. Emerging economies, which contribute increasingly to global growth, are rightly demanding a greater say in decision-making. The World Bank job — and one at the International Monetary Fund, which traditionally goes to a European — ought to be filled on merit alone. That should not exclude qualified Americans, but neither should it guarantee them a job.

The bank needs a president with experience beyond Washington’s narrow political and economic circles. Dr. Kim has worked on development in the poorest countries. One major success: leading a World Health Organization initiative that provided access to H.I.V. treatment to millions of people. The new president must also tackle broader issues of economics and growth, and manage the prickly political leaders who are the bank’s overseers. That is why the bank board must take a serious look at Dr. Kim’s strongest challenger, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Nigeria’s finance minister. As a respected economist, diplomat and former World Bank managing director, she offers many conventional qualities of bank presidents. But she breaks the mold as a woman from an African country where she fought to reduce the country’s debt, gain greater access to international credit markets and battle corruption.

The other candidate is José Antonio Ocampo, the former Colombian finance minister and high-ranking United Nations official. He, too, is a credible contender with long experience in development and international policy.

Robert Zoellick, who retires in June after five years, inherited a bank in serious trouble. He stabilized it, steered it ably through a global economic crisis and leaves it financially stronger, more focused and more inclusive — a tough act to follow.

Washington and Europe seem determined to ensure Dr. Kim’s election. The bank will almost certainly do well under his leadership. But it would do even better if the process for choosing the next president were truly competitive and fully transparent.

So this is the much ballyhooed endorsement? Doesn't it read more, "take a look at both of these other folks too?"

They don't even come out directly and say "Ngozi is the best candidate", do they?

They just ask for the process to be competitive..

ekt_bear:
Citation for bolded?

"Last year, all of the bank's 187 member countries agreed on a transparent, merit-based process to select a president."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/23/us-worldbank-idUSBRE82M05L20120323
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/9162236/President-Obama-nominates-Dartmouth-College-president-Jim-Yong-Kim-as-World-Bank-chief.html

ekt_bear: So this is the much ballyhooed endorsement? Doesn't it read more, "take a look at both of these other folks too?"

They don't even come out directly and say "Ngozi is the best candidate", do they?

They just ask for the process to be competitive..

Of course you dont expect them to come all out against their own president. We are in an election year remember

From your first link:

Unspoken is the likelihood that whoever the United States puts forward will get the job.

U.S. CANDIDATE A MYSTERY

Although the World Bank board would like to reach a consensus agreement, Washington retains the largest single voting share and could expect the support of European nations and Japan, the bank's second-largest voting member.

The United States has held the presidency since the bank's inception after World War Two, and a European has always headed its sister organization, the International Monetary Fund.

The US will get the support of its allies, and will almost certainly select the next WB president.

So of what relevance is this agreement if the US will get its way anyways?

strangerf:

Of course you dont expect them to come all out against their own president. We are in an election year remember

.......


What does that matter?

So they really think that she is the best candidate, but were too afraid to say it? Because it is an election year?

And you were silly enough to say that someone else is a conspiracy theorist, lol

From your second link:

An American has always served as World Bank head and a European has always led the International Monetary Fund due to a tacit agreement among Western nations dating back to the founding of the institutions nearly 70 years ago.

Clearly you misunderstood things if you thought this "tacit agreement" expired last year..

I would suggest that you more carefully read your own references and verify that they back up your point.